kalden yungdrung wrote:- Would be the books from the Hara Krishna written in Vedic or Sanskrit or a mix of both?
Mahābharata, Ramayāna, etc., these great epics are written classical Sanskrit.
- What is then the difference between Vedic Sanskrit and Sanskrit ?
Vedic Sanskrit is the language the Vedas are written in. These texts are quite ancient, and the brahmins claim they have no author, they are self-manifested.
- What is formal Sanskrit?
It dates from the great classic of Sanskrit grammar written by Pāṇini, sometimes in the 6th century BCE.
So when io understood it well then is there a great difference between Sanskrit and Sanskrit so are the related translations.
Very difficult to get insight into the right translations here due to the many Sanskrit languages.
The somewhat artificial term "Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit" is the language of the sutras and tantras from India. Most of these tantras have legendary origins in Oḍḍiyāna as well.
In case of Indian Dzogchen, understandable that you do prefer Sanskrit instead of Tibetan, because of the exact used Sanskrit terms.
From an academic point of view, even one beleives the Dzoghen tantras were largely written in Tibet rather than India, etc., they articulated the teachings in terms of a terminology predicated on Sanskrit and for example, the Rigpa Rangshar has a whole chapter devoted to terms which are presented in an Indic form, such as dhātu for dbying and so on. Therefore, since these texts cleary reference Sanskrit, keys terms are better backtranslated.
In terms of bon texts, I beleive it is better to use Kuntuzangpo and rigpa. Also bonku, longku, etc. However, since these terms identical to usage in Buddhism, also there is no fault of the Sanskrit equivalents are used.